| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
| World Community Grid Forums
|
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 80
|
|
| Author |
|
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3716 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
About the Reporting and Fetching work I would like to suggest an improvement on the client's internal scheduling.
----------------------------------------When I was processing a dozen or more GC units per day I could frequently notice a "stupid" behavior: BOINC sending a "report and fetch" a few seconds before the end of the job in process. With 5.10.7 and the big 3-day queue I had built at the end of GC I could even see BOINC sending a "Report and Fetch" while it was uploading results from the just-finished job! If the scheduling routine delayed any "Report" or 'Report and Fetch" request between "estimated_end_of_job minus 5 or 10 minutes" and "end_of_upload" the validation process could be accelerated for the benefit of everybody, the host side which would see a faster turnaround of completed WUs, and the impatient end users waiting for points to be given. Still with the same number of database accesses, or even less if other ready-to-report units were already waiting (happened quite often with GC and large queues).Is what I am thinking of clear enough? Cheers. Jean. |
||
|
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3716 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
And yet another two regarding the setting of Daily Schedules in the Processor and Network tabs of the Preferences.
----------------------------------------First, the current (5.10.7) description of this section is ambiguous: "Additional restrictions". Will I be entering a period of the day during which I do not want the processor or the network to be active, or during which I do want them to be active? From several posts here I think it is the latter but I still am not too sure. Second, while we are at it, why not let the end user choose (via a box or whatever else) if it is yes or no during the defined period? If somebody does not want BOINC to use one's machine during work time, or want it to run only during night (or the opposite) how is it possible the way it is in 5.10.7? Cheers. Jean. |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
To get it right: The "Ready To Report" combined with Fetch requests are interspersed with large sets of 'Result File' uploads causing portions of the 'Ready to Report' to stay behind and when then reported, fetch more work?
----------------------------------------Whether delaying that 'Ready to Report' reduces scheduler accesses, not sure as BOINC can handle up/download simultaneous. On an aside, you can even set the number of transfers it can handle simultaneous. WCG presently puts 10 minutes in between sets of 10 max for a number of reasons, one being that the estimated flops in the files get translated to Time To Complete. After the 10, the client side scheduler determines if it needs more. Believe Fetch and 'Ready to Report' access same scheduler, thus at any rate reporting more than 10 results would always lead to at least 2 sets of downloads. Anyway, there are special schedule 'beings' that have concocted this and see some reverse engineered logic.... but mine is not necessarily those of others. Oops, the 'ambiguous' was already identified. A later 5.10 will phrase it so it means to indicate additional contact times and work block times. To work/network or not per schedule is set via the Activity menu, but are you looking for a box to enable / disable the extras?
WCG
----------------------------------------Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! [Edit 4 times, last edit by Sekerob at Jul 6, 2007 5:06:10 PM] |
||
|
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3716 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Whether delaying that 'Ready to Report' reduces scheduler accesses, not sure as BOINC can handle up/download simultaneous. On an aside, you can even set the number of transfers it can handle simultaneous. No, no, it's not a contention problem between the upload and download streams. Especially with GC where files were small, at least for an ADSL connection. It's a matter of timing. The "problem" is that the Report command arrives in the server side just before the WU being uploaded or about to finish processing is sitting in the server expecting a Report command for becoming "Pending validation". And then probably the next Report command to come will not be before one hour or more... Is it better? Jean. |
||
|
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3716 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
To work/network or not per schedule is set via the Activity menu, but are you looking for a box to enable / disable the extras? OK, let's make it simpler for explaining, and only consider the general "everyday between hour of" line. What I am thinking of is adding before "everyday between hour of", say, a popup showing "work" or "don't work". Giving a clear (and up to the user) result of work everyday between hour of 09:00 and 18:00Am I improving a little? And apply the same reasoning to each individual line of the daily schedule section below it. Cheers. Jean. |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Did not mean a contention... there is none. When the line is open with the client, it attempts to squeeze as much in, in terms of transfer.... uploads usually much slower than downloads (ISP restriction here). It may thus have intend to ask just before finishing. It just comes to mind that there are these fancy features that allow to tell the client NOT to start a job if it turns out to be redundant or junk.... adherence to security: Client initiated contact.
----------------------------------------I speculate. GC was not small, like 0.5mb compressed.... see those FA@H babies... 60k sometimes.
WCG
----------------------------------------Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! [Edit 1 times, last edit by Sekerob at Jul 6, 2007 5:50:15 PM] |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
okay suggestion: Get the throttle as smooth as the WCGCPUthrottle of Threadmaster. The Berkeley forum admin was not interested in TM incorporation as it only runs Windows.... but it has it figured out even of C2D Laptop and never does the fan kick in at 75%, in this heat.
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I was thinking more team stats
----------------------------------------You get great stats about yourself and how you are getting on What about how your team and team members are doing a la stats.free-dc.org but within the BOINC Window. Throttle would be a good idea so my leg isn't so warm while I post in the forum The WCGtisation of the Client has made great strides ![]() ![]() |
||
|
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Oh and lose the never right hours mins secs to go on a work unit
----------------------------------------pointless and confusing ![]() |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
All these wonderful ideas.... please keep them pouring in.
Of course, they won't all be implemented. They can't be; some of the goals contradict each other. But later on, we can pick out these conflicts and discuss ways of reconciling them. Mr Autumns: I think your last idea would be worse than the disease. But while I was typing this reply, I had another idea: confidence limits! If BOINC tracks past performance for a project, then for a FAAH unit it can predict 9 hours ± 3 hours, and for a more predictable project it could say 6 hours ± 10 minutes. Good idea? Dud? |
||
|
|
|